GUILTY WI - Apple River multiple stabbing; one teen dead, 4 other people hurt; 52 year old man arrested, July 2022

[Chimera]

I saw the whole trial, and watched the video frame by frame several times. That is what I saw. The video does not show Miu's hand when it jabs, just his arm going forward. Ryley holding phone up. But, as he pulls away it shows knife in hand. I guess we disagree.

Calling someone names should not lead to murder. Especially when it is a bunch of immature drunk 17 year olds. He should have walked away. Just how many times was he asked, demanded to leave where the boys were. He went out of his way to get close to the boys. I suspect he did not like a bunch of noisy boys hurting his peaceful river trip. Though he could not have predicted the final outcome.

Ita.
If a group calls me names or whatever -- I'm not going to get up close and personal.
If I feel seriously threatened, I might call LE.
But my first plan of action is to move away from them and to keep a healthy distance.
Omo.

 

[ShadyLady]

Ok, but the police, prosecutor, ect don't agree with what you see. We all have a right to our opinions though.

I dont think prosecution went there because you dont actally see the knife going in. And Ryley could not remember much, and I dont think anyone actually saw it. It happened quick.

 

[otto]

Hi Megnut
One thought ) came to me on the way home from great grand meeting. What we at Websleuths and many other sites learn to do so we don't go to Websleuths jail. We learn to scroll on by if we can't reply to someone without attacking. While this thought is in no way as serious as this river attack. NM had many opportunities to "scroll" on by without taking on any harm. He could have ignored the taunting and practiced removing himself from a "dangerous" situation. He could have gone back to his group without any harm. He did not have to stand his ground. He could have scrolled on back.

I see many comments about it being Nicolae's responsibility to walk away and do nothing while being taunted and shoved by drunk, rowdy, rude, aggressive young men between the ages of 17 and 24. That group increased in size to 13 people.

Wasn't it the responsibility of the drunks to walk away and leave the man alone?

 

[poppyquiche]

I see many comments about it being Nicolae's responsibility to walk away and do nothing while being taunted and shoved by drunk, rowdy, rude, aggressive young men between the ages of 17 and 24. That group increased in size to 13 people.

Wasn't it the responsibility of the drunks to walk away and leave the man alone?

I mean, for one thing, the initial group of rowdy obnoxious taunting people included literal teenagers. I get it: they were being [redacted/you all fill in the blanks], NM understandably got upset because they were being rude punks.
If he'd just left when it started and acted like the 52-year-old adult in the situation, or just not even gone over there to begin with, the group wouldn't have increased, and things would not have even gotten remotely that heated, from where I'm sitting.

Obviously from this thread it is clear that people are interpreting the situation in different ways which is of course our collective right and totally fine, from my own personal perspective I'm just wary of the number of times that I've seen things like "well they were being mean and rude and taunting him and should have been respectful" used as justification. Does what those kids were doing rise to the level of maybe calling the police or rushing back off to your friends or cursing them out as you leave? Sure, maybe. But now teenagers calling an older, presumably more respectable adult names justifies that adult sticking around (because...why? He wanted to "prove the kids wrong" about what they were saying about him? Or the phone, which wasn't even his and his friend didn't seem that fussed about, was just THAT important? It's a cell phone for crying out loud! And I don't even think anyone else was paying attention to or cared about their stupid name-calling, for one thing), and then stabbing five people? AND then just walking away and not, say, calling 911 immediately?

 

[CrimeTheorist]

If he's convicted it will be because of the lies he told afterwards, that part is tough to justify.

 

[Chimera]

There is a longer 1st video. That is only a small portion.

Here's the whole video and the kid that filmed it.

I just watched it.^^^

At 12:00 min. NM has his snorkel and is already at the inner tube floats.
At 37:26 where NM is walking away, the stabbing has already happened.

The first video is played at the trial after the second vid. in order to show how this escalated; imo.

The first video starts at 37:40-ish where NM initially walks away.
Why did he come back ?
His friend could've used the "find my phone" app to locate it as well .
Omo.

 

[HanniBJeter]

just like KR NM went looking for trouble and he found it. JMO

can’t even compare these two situations.

 

[AC's Grandma]

OK, I've made my decision and I'm sticking with it.

*Drum Roll*

Nicolae Miu is not guilty of all charges on the indictment (IMO). The main reason for this is that the prosecution throughout this case was just... awful. Starting right from the beginning with the decision to overcharge NM on counts 1-5 all the way through to calling witnesses who provided way too little testimony that they could reference in their closing argument/rebuttal to disprove NM's self defence claim, and instead brought with them a bevy of bad facts which the defense was able to exploit with very skillful questioning.
I think they absolutely took it for granted that once they got to trial the jury would sympathise with these traumatised teenagers and severely wounded young adults over this weird old man who ran in on a group of high schoolers, went on a knife rampage and then lied repeatedly in the aftermath.

Even if he is acquitted I don't think Nic Miu will have gone unpunished for his wrongdoing. He's spent nearly 2 years in prison, lost his marriage and will probably spend the rest of his life facing civil lawsuits as a result of this incident. A large number of people who followed this trial take a very different view to me, and to them he will always be a child killer.

He didn’t lose his marriage, they divorced to protect their assets in a civil suit. His wife testified to that and that she loves him during her testimony.

 

[Chimera]

Could be. Unfortunately I kind of zoned out during defense witnesses. The whole interpreter thing made it difficult.

If NM couldn't understand what the young people were saying, he may have thought they were making serious threats.
Adding a language barrier to this mess.
Omo.

 

[IDK]

I mean, for one thing, the initial group of rowdy obnoxious taunting people included literal teenagers. I get it: they were being [redacted/you all fill in the blanks], NM understandably got upset because they were being rude punks.
If he'd just left when it started and acted like the 52-year-old adult in the situation, or just not even gone over there to begin with, the group wouldn't have increased, and things would not have even gotten remotely that heated, from where I'm sitting.

Obviously from this thread it is clear that people are interpreting the situation in different ways which is of course our collective right and totally fine, from my own personal perspective I'm just wary of the number of times that I've seen things like "well they were being mean and rude and taunting him and should have been respectful" used as justification. Does what those kids were doing rise to the level of maybe calling the police or rushing back off to your friends or cursing them out as you leave? Sure, maybe. But now teenagers calling an older, presumably more respectable adult names justifies that adult sticking around (because...why? He wanted to "prove the kids wrong" about what they were saying about him? Or the phone, which wasn't even his and his friend didn't seem that fussed about, was just THAT important? It's a cell phone for crying out loud! And I don't even think anyone else was paying attention to or cared about their stupid name-calling, for one thing), and then stabbing five people? AND then just walking away and not, say, calling 911 immediately?

Honest question here—how could NM have possibly known they were teens “just playing around” vs. a mob of young adults out to cause trouble? I can’t see how he could have known that?
I mean they certainly behaved like belligerent 2 year olds, but by size and physical maturity, they could easily have been inebriated adults.

 

[Fidobell]

1am here in Scotland . Followed this from the start and I'll be back in the morning .
thank you for all the links , much appreciated .

 

[poppyquiche]

Honest question here—how could NM have possibly known they were teens “just playing around” vs. a mob of young adults out to cause trouble? I can’t see how he could have known that?
I mean they certainly behaved like belligerent 2 year olds, but by size and physical maturity, they could easily have been inebriated adults.

For me, as a lifelong Wisconsinite? I would have assumed absolutely everyone on that river was drunk as heck and thus extremely unpredictable (sorry fellow Sconnies; I'm just working off of 4+ decades of personal experience here. Especially up there -- everyone's going to have had at least a few beers).
I probably would have wondered the same thing about their ages -- likely before I even approached them -- which is why I wouldn't be over there one second longer than I had to be, or at all. Drunk people are super unpredictable and these sorts of activities in the summer here during our 2.5 months of swimming weather can be FULL of absolutely objectively stupid behavior.
It does not make the boys/mens' awful behavior "OK". But also no one pointed a gun at the defendant, or said they were going to kill him or fight him or keep him from leaving or follow him to his car or whatever. In fact they were quite literally telling him to go away, if anything. Teenagers and young adults yelling random stupid crap at me -- when I've chosen to be near them, should reasonably guess/suspect they're drinking or drunk, and I have an exit -- is not in and of itself immediately a violent threat, to me.

 

[bobbymkii]

1am here in Scotland . Followed this from the start and I'll be back in the morning .
thank you for all the links , much appreciated .

at last! A fellow Brit in the thread!

 

[otto]

I mean, for one thing, the initial group of rowdy obnoxious taunting people included literal teenagers. I get it: they were being [redacted/you all fill in the blanks], NM understandably got upset because they were being rude punks.
If he'd just left when it started and acted like the 52-year-old adult in the situation, or just not even gone over there to begin with, the group wouldn't have increased, and things would not have even gotten remotely that heated, from where I'm sitting.

Obviously from this thread it is clear that people are interpreting the situation in different ways which is of course our collective right and totally fine, from my own personal perspective I'm just wary of the number of times that I've seen things like "well they were being mean and rude and taunting him and should have been respectful" used as justification. Does what those kids were doing rise to the level of maybe calling the police or rushing back off to your friends or cursing them out as you leave? Sure, maybe. But now teenagers calling an older, presumably more respectable adult names justifies that adult sticking around (because...why? He wanted to "prove the kids wrong" about what they were saying about him? Or the phone, which wasn't even his and his friend didn't seem that fussed about, was just THAT important? It's a cell phone for crying out loud! And I don't even think anyone else was paying attention to or cared about their stupid name-calling, for one thing), and then stabbing five people? AND then just walking away and not, say, calling 911 immediately?

It doesn't seem like this was the first time this drunk gang harassed someone. They pulled together quickly and were easily emboldened to escalate the situation. That gives me the impression that this was their normal behaviour.

If they were too young to drive a car, then perhaps they were too stupid to know better. However, if they are old enough to drive a car on a busy street, then they knew better than to taunt and harass a man by publicly accusing him of criminal offences against children. If that's their idea of fun, they should have realized that one day it would stop being fun for them. If it wasn't Nicolae who stood up to them, it would be someone else.

I bet that none of those drunken, rude, aggressive men aged 17 - 24 have repeated what they did that day ... when they victimized an older, new immigrant for their amusement.

 

[otto]

Honest question here—how could NM have possibly known they were teens “just playing around” vs. a mob of young adults out to cause trouble? I can’t see how he could have known that?
I mean they certainly behaved like belligerent 2 year olds, but by size and physical maturity, they could easily have been inebriated adults.

They were not children who were playing, although I did see testimony from one of the drunk, belligerent men testify that he's a child. They were adult enough to get alcohol and to get drunk, and they appeared as a coherent gang. Someone forgot to teach them manners and socialization. None of this would have happened if those drunk young men respected others.

 

[Tippy Lynn]

It doesn't seem like this was the first time this drunk gang harassed someone. They pulled together quickly and were easily emboldened to escalate the situation. That gives me the impression that this was their normal behaviour.

If they were too young to drive a car, then perhaps they were too stupid to know better. However, if they are old enough to drive a car on a busy street, then they knew better than to taunt and harass a man by publicly accusing him of criminal offences against children. If that's their idea of fun, they should have realized that one day it would stop being fun for them. If it wasn't Nicolae who stood up to them, it would be someone else.

I bet that none of those drunken, rude, aggressive men aged 17 - 24 have repeated what they did that day ... when they victimized an older, new immigrant for their amusement.

NM isn’t a new immigrant- he’s lived here for most of his life.

 

[otto]

NM isn’t a new immigrant- he’s lived here for most of his life.

That may well be true, but he has a strong foreign accent. He would have been perceived as a new immigrant by the drunk, belligerent, men that were publicly accusing him of a criminal offence against children.

 

[shotgun09]

The sounds of the video replayed over and over, are a trigger to me. The yelling, screaming, cackling and taunting I watched and heard remind me of the coyotes who run in the woods near my home, when they corner and attack an unsuspecting or injured deer. It's a sound you don't forget. It is the sound of terror, IMO.

 

[danablue1]

can’t even compare these two situations.

why not? what do you expect to happen when you bring a weapon, you are prepared to use it

 

[poppyquiche]

It doesn't seem like this was the first time this drunk gang harassed someone. They pulled together quickly and were easily emboldened to escalate the situation. That gives me the impression that this was their normal behaviour.

If they were too young to drive a car, then perhaps they were too stupid to know better. However, if they are old enough to drive a car on a busy street, then they knew better than to taunt and harass a man by publicly accusing him of criminal offences against children. If that's their idea of fun, they should have realized that one day it would stop being fun for them. If it wasn't Nicolae who stood up to them, it would be someone else.

I bet that none of those drunken, rude, aggressive men aged 17 - 24 have repeated what they did that day ... when they victimized an older, new immigrant for their amusement.

OK I promise I'm done for now after this. But.

Is the thought, then, someone who's not even old enough to vote deserved to be KILLED over this? If I say something horrible basically out of the clear blue sky to somebody in a parking lot tomorrow, even when I'm not doing anything to keep them from leaving and I'm not telling them I am going to physically harm them and am, in fact, TELLING them to leave me alone, they can just blow my head off if they think I might be bigger or stronger or younger, because they're older and scared of me and insisting on staying by my car even though I just called them something awful? Over words? I mean, I've worked in large cities many times over the years. Mentally unstable people have said crazy random stuff to me when I was walking on the street. Nothing immediately physically threatening, but weird/confusing/negative. I still didn't run back and pull out a knife and stab them while they told me to go away because it hurt my feelings so much.

I completely understand the part where people are offended and upset that they were being [you all know] and saying awful things. I guess I could see someone maybe getting punched or shoved over all of this, but even then it's still supremely stupid IF FOR NO OTHER REASON THAN look at what it's gotten the defendant into. Like. I'm just completely not understanding WHAT it was about this that made it not only such that he COULD NOT possibly leave, AND an immediate threat to his life, and so there was no other alternative? I GET being like "what a bunch of [...], how dare they, that's an outrageous thing to say, I'm calling in a complaint/telling management/etc". I just am not seeing why THAT behavior needed MULTIPLE people to get stabbed over. One of them disemboweled and another a minor who is dead. "I'd be annoyed and angry if a bunch of [...] kids called me that too!" is still not in and of itself a reason to be able to kill someone who is unarmed and never claimed to be armed.

OK all: thank you for letting me ramble. I will take my leave for now.